Main navigation

One Word or Two? Plus: Books I Dislike

On my third date with my future husband, we went to a modern art exhibition in midtown Manhattan. All I remember from it was an installation of a gigantic eyelash. In any case, sometimes when I see modern art I want to say, “My eight-year-old could do that!”

I do not have an eight-year-old child.

Sometimes I feel like the opposite is true with regard to literature. Take the Modern Library’s 100 best novels of all time, for instance. More than a few of the books that made it onto the list are so utterly boring and difficult, I can’t imagine anyone has ever finished them. It’s like a book’s fame is inversely related to its readability.

As promised in my last blog, I will give you a very partial list of classics I dislike. But first, let’s do a little grammar.

Today’s installment is about two words that become one, or one word that becomes two. I have some very easy hacks, so don’t fret. You’ll nail these in no time at all.

anyone vs. any one

Anyone is a pronoun such as “he,” “she,” “they,” etc. If you substitute one of these pronouns for “anyone” and it works, you need “anyone.” In fact, think of “anyone” as a non-specific pronoun.

If you cannot substitute a pronoun for “anyone” in your sentence, use “any one,” which refers to a specific person or object.

Here are some examples. In the parentheses I will substitute a pronoun for anyone/any one, so you can see for yourself how to figure out which word or words to use.

Would anyone like to play tennis? (substitute “he”: “Would he like to play tennis?”)

Would any one of you like to play tennis? (substitute “she”: “Would she of you like to play tennis?”)

I loved the musical, Anyone Can Whistle. (“We can whistle.”)

You may choose any one of these candies. (“You may choose they of these candies.”)

awhile vs. a while

“Awhile” is an adverb (a word that modifies a verb); the “while” in “a while” is a noun, and is preceded by a preposition, usually “for” or “in.” Try substituting another noun for “while.” If it works, use “a while.”

We ran around the block awhile. (Here, “awhile” is modifying the verb “ran.”)

We ran around the block for a while. (1. Uses the preposition “for.” 2. Substitute the noun “hour” for “while”: “We ran around the block for an hour.”)

Before Teresa married, she lived awhile in Boston. (The verb “lived” is modified by “awhile.”)

Teresa hasn’t been to Boston in a while. (1. Uses the preposition “in.” 2. Substitute a noun: “Teresa hasn’t been to Boston in a blue moon.”)

everyday vs. every day

“Everyday” is an adjective; “every day” is an adverb.

I dislike the song “Everyday People.” (“Everyday” is an adjective modifying the noun “People.”)

When I was a kid, I heard that awful song, “Everyday People,” every day. (“Every day” is an adverb modifying the verb “heard.”)

Every one of my constituents sent me text messages. (“Each and every one of my constituents sent me text messages.”)

Everyone needs protein. (“Everybody needs protein.”)

You need protein in every one of your meals. (“You need protein in each and every one of your meals.”)

into vs. in to

Here’s Doozie number 1.

The word “into” is a preposition. It illustrates some sort of action, movement, or change. The term “in to” is used when “in” belongs to one word or phrase and “to” belongs to another, different word or phrase.

Jeremy put the coin into the charity box. (Jeremy is doing an action. So is the coin, for that matter.)

I will put the coin in to activate the washing machine. (“Put in” is what some people call a two-word verb, while “to activate” is an infinitive. And by the way, it is usually better to keep the verb (or adverb) phrase together: “I will put in the coin to activate the washing machine.”)

Debbie’s drone flew into the tree. (Forward movement. Drone goes to the tree.)

Debbie flew in to Denver. (“Flew in” is a standalone phrase, while “to” is a preposition attached to the object “Denver.”)

This blog has turned into a mammoth article. (“Turned into” shows change.)

What do you say we turn in to go to sleep.

My brother is really into reggae music. (First of all, I don’t have a brother. Secondly, I am not a big fan of people being “into” something. I suggest they be passionate about it or interested in it or involved in it.)

onto vs. on to

This one’s Doozie number 2.

Like “into,” “onto” also illustrates action or movement, and is a preposition. With regard to the phrase “on to,” the word “on” is part of a two-word verb and “to” is a preposition or the first part of an infinitive, much like “in to.” I personally feel that “onto” vs. “on to” is more nuanced than “into” vs. “in to,” and therefore sometimes both may be right.

I held onto the book so nobody would steal it. (I actively held something.)

I held on to my dream of becoming a ballerina. (“Held on” is a two-word verb phrase.)

I held on to the railing. (Some people would write “I held onto the railing.“)

She threw the chair onto the porch. (Can’t get any more active than that. And p.s.: If you want to learn about “anymore” vs. “any more,” see this.)

Don’t think you can get away with it; I’m onto you.

Some British-English purists prefer to use “on to” exclusively. See this article for an explanation.

***

As promised: books I dislike

These are taken from the Modern Library’s list.

Lolita. Okay, I haven’t read it since college, but the subject matter is so offensive that I was unable to uncover its greatness. (No pun intended with “uncover.”)

Lord of the Flies. I read this as an adult, and it made me sick. Such cruelty. Can someone please tell me the point of this book? And why it’s great? I’m serious; am I missing something?

Ulysses. Now hear this: If you can’t make sense, you can’t be called a brilliant writer. Who wants to read a thousand pages describing every second of one woman’s day? No, I was not an adult when I tried to read it, which might account for some of my negativity, but I don’t like his other books either.

Portnoy’s Complaint. Yes it was funny in some parts, but remind me why it’s great. Does “innovative” and “groundbreaking” have to mean great? And I thought the ending was incredibly dumb.

Sophie’s Choice. How did this get on the list? I mean, it was entertaining and all that, but it’s no War and Peace (although War and Peace is no War and Peace).

For another list of the 50 greatest books of all time, go to http://thegreatestbooks.org/. I agree with more of the choices on this list than on the Modern Library’s list.

Your turn

I’d love to see your list of books you dislike. Let me know in the Comments, below. And please let me know how you feel about my choices. Lord of the Flies fans: In the Comments section, please give me your opinion of the book, and why it’s worth my rereading it.

Reader Interactions

Comments

Hi All,
I laughed at your “I hate” book list! It’s been years since I dismissed oodles and oodles of supposed art, music and literature. Nor do I apologize for it. There are still gems out there – even modern ones – but you have to look for them. I have found, however, that the world is in such a state of confusion that I see no reason to clutter my head and heart with all the mess. So I’ve become very discriminating. It’s makes for healthier living.
If you want a recommendation, nothing – absolutely nothing – beats the Lord of the Rings for beautiful writing. ( Harry Potter was a stroke of genius although after three books, I quit. The violence was too much.)

Thanks, Yaffa! I agree that being discriminating is good practice, with just a wee bit of adventurousness. I also think it’s fine to put a book down if it’s too bad/violent/boring, etc. We all have enough guilt in our lives; we should be able to read or not read what we want without feeling like we’ve failed.

It’s funny as an Australian to read the clarification of ‘onto’ – I’ve read it in American texts but it is not a word that I would ever use myself. ‘Into’ or ‘in to’ are a different story.

Books. Anything by Brett Easton Ellis but especially American Psycho. My bug bear actually. Hate, loathe, am repulsed by not only the graphic and disgusting violence, but the blatant manipulation of the reader and the character (like many of his characters) is not only unlikeable but thoroughly BORING. I read it as a very young woman and it disturbed my view on life immensely. I was also too impressionable to the authority of books to think I could throw the book against the wall, as I should have. Books I’ve thrown against the wall – ‘Siddharta’ by Herman Hesse. I picked it back up because it is a great story and he is a terrific and philosophically important writer, but it annoys me immensely how as a woman you are unceremoniously chucked out of the book half way through as being incapable of achieving enlightenment. I was on board 100% until then. Aldous Huxley’s Brave New World – again for reasons of heinous and offensive sexism, I didn’t get past page 3. If a thinking intelligent man imagining a new future (I know, it’s a dystopia, but still) can’t imagine female medical students in that world, I’m dead at page 3. Lord of the Rings. Too much description and too little action. Impression began with the Hobbit in year 9… another book I hated. I like the films. Also, if I don’t know what the hell happened at the end of the book… obtuseness is not great writing. My two cents worth!

Hi, Katinka, and thank you so much for your comment! You made a very important remark: “It disturbed my view on life immensely.” That is such a vital point; books can have a powerful effect on us, both positive and negative. I was thinking of Atwood’s “The Handmaid’s Tale,” which one of my readers mentioned to me. It disturbed me so greatly over twenty-five years ago that I’m still haunted by it.

However, there are books that have had such a positive effect that I’ve reread them several times.

Thanks, Deena, for clearing up doubts about those double words. I will print your post and keep a copy near my PC and one to share with my students.
I haven’t been able to get through these books,
The Satanic Verses,
Archipelago Gulag,
The First Circle
All Harry Potter Books.

Hi Deena,
Good on you for your frank response to some of the classics.
I agree that sometime around the beginning of the twentieth century the idea of literary quality parted company with the idea of readability. Some twentieth and twenty-first century writers definitely considered it a virtue to challenge readers and derail their expectations. Dickens and Austen would never have written Ulysses (which has made its point about our lives being an odyssey through the mundane, and hopefully we don’t need to go there again! At least as far as I’m concerned).
I differ on ‘Lord of the Flies’ though. I thought it was a powerful book. The cruelty of the boys is the point – their civilisation is a veneer which cracks under pressure. The world view portrayed by a lot of modernist literature is pretty bleak, I guess. I think it’s possible to recognise a book as being a great evocation of something I don’t necessarily like or agree with. I can respect such literature on its own terms, but I wouldn’t want to read it too often!

Thank you, Alison, for your comment. I couldn’t agree more with your assessment of twentieth and twenty-first century literature.
And I am really grateful that you took the time to explain about Lord of the Flies. It helped me understand better. It is true that the subject matter was so upsetting to me that I was blind to its point.
All the best,
Deena

Hi, I’m Deena Nataf

I’m a book and journal editor with thirty years of experience in the field. If you write to publish, I want to help you get that first draft written, that manuscript finished, and that book out the door. If you write for yourself, I’ll give you the tools you need to write clearly, write regularly, and write in your own voice. But no matter why you write, I’m passionate about helping you make your mark on the world.